FoxShutter wrote:
KeepCalm wrote:
telefunk wrote:
KeepCalm wrote:
So after all this it is really is a snap judgement on kit you have not really come to terms with or got to know and did not want to know. I will just read the review in that light and all is clear now.
You guys here on the Canon forum are like a pack of bloodthirsty hounds going for the kill. Even Canon can sometimes be second best....
Can someone here still offer his/her honest opinion? The guy uses a Fuji X100F for god's sake... he knows what he's saying....
Giving a camera a 2 start rating is a very harsh judgement and we have not seen any sign that there are any drawbacks with the RX100. Your statement on ergonomics got knocked out of the ground.
I think we are allowed to state our opinions without being called bloodthirsty hounds.
These are just cameras and no need for this sort of description and what on earth owning a X100F has to do with the validity of someone's opinion I do not know.
I honestly dont think it worths more than 2* in this comparison . As a standalone camera it could be a bit more ;however, there is an additional factor - the cost of $1400 US Dollars + TAXES ! Canon recently dropped the price to $1200 due to a low demand perhaps . When Sony released the RX10III, the price had to be raised , actually , by $100 due to the high demand .
If this Canon would cost about $900 it would worth more stars . However , at the moment of my review it didn’t stand the competition also from the price point .
I also think , that Canon G5X or G7Xii are much more attractive options as Sony RX100 series competitors.
It appears to be $1100 on Amazon. It has a small target audience. I wouldn't trade my G7X II for it.